in the 1980s was the absolute tits. I found a load of old back issues a while back and the standard of writing was way better than in today's NME or Q. In many ways they treated their readers like adults and their interviewees like kids, which made for great reading. I used to buy Smash Hits and MM which was also having a golden age at the same time.

Just in the first one you have a page of single reviews which includes Bucks Fizz, Dollar and The Anti Nowhere League and Holger Czukay. On the same page. In a supposedly 'teen pop' magazine. They don't make em like that any more.

The quality of writing is far above that found today not only in NME or on a million music blogs but even in the music sections of broadsheet papers.

However after that last belter who was in charge I flicked through a couple of her first issues and there seemed to be like some actual writing in there, and even on some page more words than pictures. So fair play to her

The trend has been further online, and their online offering has been abject for ages.

Me, I'd make the magazine like a kind of Blizzard for music, offer cheap sub deals, an app with discounted digital only subscription, then use the website for reviews for free as a traffic generator and properly work on the UX for integrating facebook, twitter, ticket buying, spotify the works.

not what they don't put on it, but all the stuff they do run that even if they ran 10 things you're into, there are about 70 bits of google-bait about bands the average NME reader wouldn't really care about, who haven't really done anything the magazine would write kindly about for 30 years.

sometimes I worry if their website, for all its reach, has done the magazine harm, which I realise is somewhat contrary. it could be such an asset.